Larger Maps vs. Slower Speeds vs. AI Expansion

I find it much easier to build large empires on larger maps simply because the unhappiness per city is lower.

I was playing on King with a huge map and marathon speed. India covered the map with over 47 cities. The Incas had over 20. This was on a frontier map (which I happen to love btw). Rome and Ethopia were crushed. Rome in medival times and Ethopia in the atomic era.

So obviously expansion or not depends on many variables. So there is no hard and fast rule that certain civs don't expand or map size/speed/etc. have a causel effect on what will happen in any given game.

On the lower levels like warlord and prince 9/10 map is already covered be about early renassiance in as byzantium spain was on the other continent and settled a good 30 cities no conquering on there behalf until I came and they tried to prove who the most land even though was just trying to liberate vienna from the huns by the end of the game that 30 cities became 37 cities mainly conquering the huns.

I always play on huge maps so I must say that I have also noticed the difference in G&K's that most AI players now take more time to expand their empire. Then again, it also totally depends on the civlization that they play. For example, usually Theodora and Dido seem to have a liking to keep their empire small in the earlier eras (especially Dido, at some point, decides to grow her empire way bigger) while Theresa and William are expansion lovers. They now take some more time to expand, usually until the Renaissance or Industrial era, but usually the biggest part of the map becomes colonized in my games.
I actually like it more this way, I've also once had a game where I was next to Persia and he started spawning cities like madness even before the Medieval era. I just quit that game as I could never compete 5 vs 25 cities, especially against Persia.

Bakspatel said:

I just quit that game as I could never compete 5 vs 25 cities, especially against Persia.

Click to expand...

If it helps... I'm playing Persia right now and got 2-3x the cities of the AI (land constraints mostly, by the time they were ready to expand past 6-10 cities I had most of the world on this large map, currently sitting at 21 cities) so the AI is feeling your pain right now!

Especially Spain, just convinced both China and Polynesia to join me in a war against her (she's got like 8 cities I think) so I can scrub her Judaism-founding butt off my continent and away from my long-term CS allies (Vatican City was the first CS I met in the game and I allied with them early when Spain DoWed me... they've been my ally since before I learned to use a bow and now they're shelling Madrid with artillery fire in support of my campaign!)... even if her lands are craptastic and extremely resource poor, I want my elbow room (plus I just got Landships and she had the audacity to build Petra in a city with access to 3 desert tiles so I'm gonna get my Last Crusade achievement!)

Thanks for all the feedback. It seems that there are a wide variety of possibilities across games. Some people seem to be getting big maps filled up, others have run into the same issue I and others have seen. Clearly there are lots of variables at work, and we will likely have a better read on the situation as we gain experience with G&K.

I understand the people that like the slower rate of expansion. Personally, I don't like when the map is mostly wilderness for most of the game. It just feels wrong to me. I feel like the game should follow a more logical progression of early expansion, later development. Afterall, most parts of the real world were settled to some degree fairly quickly in human history. But from a gameplay perspective, I understand that some people don't want that in the game.

I can say after 5 games - that on huge maps, with many AI, there is no any other diffirent course for those stupid AI than trying to battling all neighbours around with 2-3 stupid cities. Or even one city! While player can lazily spawn settlers AND battling almost everyone around.

I saw those difines in AI files, and those priorities for military units minimizing expansion priority. Tried to change some numbers in hope that AI will build cities first and only than will try to battle for space... but no cigar (

sorry bad spelling